Radiologic Assessment of Interbody Fusion

Author:

Duits Anneli A.A.123ORCID,van Urk Paul R.1,Lehr A. Mechteld1ORCID,Nutzinger Don1ORCID,Reijnders Maarten R.L.1ORCID,Weinans Harrie14ORCID,Foppen Wouter1ORCID,Oner F. Cuhmur1ORCID,van Gaalen Steven M.15ORCID,Kruyt Moyo C.16ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands

2. Department of Orthopedic surgery, Diakonessenhuis, Utrecht, Zeist, the Netherlands

3. Department of Orthopedics, Clinical Orthopedic Research Center (CORC-mN), Diakonessenhuis Utrecht/Zeist, Utrecht, the Netherlands

4. Department of biomechanical Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands

5. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Acibadem Internal Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

6. Department of Developmental BioEngineering, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands

Abstract

Background: Lumbar interbody fusion (IF) is a common procedure to fuse the anterior spine. However, a lack of consensus on image-based fusion assessment limits the validity and comparison of IF studies. This systematic review aims to (1) report on IF assessment strategies and definitions and (2) summarize available literature on the diagnostic reliability and accuracy of these assessments. Methods: Two searches were performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Search 1 identified studies on adult lumbar IF that provided a detailed description of image-based fusion assessment. Search 2 analyzed studies on the reliability of specific fusion criteria/classifications and the accuracy assessed with surgical exploration. Results: A total of 442 studies were included for search 1 and 8 studies for search 2. Fusion assessment throughout the literature was highly variable. Eighteen definitions and more than 250 unique fusion assessment methods were identified. The criteria that showed most consistent use were continuity of bony bridging, radiolucency around the cage, and angular motion <5°. However, reliability and accuracy studies were scarce. Conclusion: This review highlights the challenges in reaching consensus on IF assessment. The variability in IF assessment is very high, which limits the translatability of studies. Accuracy studies are needed to guide innovations of assessment. Future IF assessment strategies should focus on the standardization of computed tomography–based continuity of bony bridging. Knowledge from preclinical and imaging studies can add valuable information to this ongoing discussion. Level of Evidence: Diagnostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Orthopedics and Sports Medicine,Surgery

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3